IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE - generated by our News Release ListServer
DO NOT REPLY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE
District 4 Patrol 218 West Yakima, Jerome, ID 83338-5904 (208) 324-6000
Fax (208) 324-7897
For Immediate Release: June 16, 2013 5:00 pm
Please direct questions to the District Office
Idaho State Police is currently investigating a 2 vehicle fatal crash on Interstate 84 at milepost 200,near the Jerome/Minidoka County line.
At approximately 2:55 pm, a 2000 Dodge Caravan drove off the road from the eastbound side, through the median, and struck a 2008 Nissan Pathfinder traveling on the westbound side.
One person is confirmed deceased, one person was transported via air ambulance, and two were transported by ground ambulance.
The westbound side currently has one lane blocked while crews work to clear the scene.
Names are being with-held pending notification of kin.
-------------
2 Vehicle Fatal Crash on I-84
↧
↧
CNET: NSA spying flap extends to contents of U.S. phone calls
CNET: NSA spying flap extends to contents of U.S. phone calls by Declan McCullagh:
National Security Agency discloses in secret Capitol Hill briefing that thousands of analysts can listen to domestic phone calls. That authorization appears to extend to e-mail and text messages too.
↧
Susan on MSNBC: Sexual Assault at Naval Academy
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
↧
Dick Cheney Defends NSA Surveillance...Again
Dick Cheney came out of the woodwork today to defend warrantless NSA surveillance.
The former No. 2 in the Bush administration defended the NSA's ability to monitor phone and email data, and labeled as a "traitor" the analyst who has admitted...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
3,500 Jurors May Be Called for James Holmes Case
The judge in the Aurora Theater shooting case of James Holmes wrote in an order yesterday that 3,500 prospective jurors may be called for his trial. The order, which grants the defense request for a questionnaire to be submitted to jurors in advance...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
↧
NYT: Fears of National ID With Immigration Bill
NYT: Fears of National ID With Immigration Bill by Eric Lipton:
WASHINGTON — Driver’s license photographs and biographic information of most Americans would be accessible through an expanded Department of Homeland Security nationwide computer network if the immigration legislation pending before the Senate becomes law.
↧
Update on Fatal Crash
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE - generated by our News Release ListServer
DO NOT REPLY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE
District 4 Patrol 218 West Yakima, Jerome, ID 83338-5904 (208) 324-6000
Fax (208) 324-7897
For Immediate Release: June 16, 2013 7:30 pmPlease direct questions to the District Office
**********Updated Info***********
The names of the drivers are being released.
The driver of the Dodge Caravan, Marvin Locke, 48, of Twin Falls, Idaho, was transported to St. Lukes Magic Valley via air ambulance.
The driver of the 2008 Nissan Pathfinder, Candace Redman, 36, of Poquoson, Virgina, succombed to her injuries at the scene of the crash. Her two children, Aaron Redman and Lelia Redman were both transported via ground ambulance to Minidoka Memorial Hospital.
Next of kin has been notified.
All drivers and passengers were wearing seatbelts.
******Previously Released*******8
Idaho State Police is currently investigating a 2 vehicle fatal crash on Interstate 84 at milepost 200,near the Jerome/Minidoka County line.
At approximately 2:55 pm, a 2000 Dodge Caravan drove off the road from the eastbound side, through the median, and struck a 2008 Nissan Pathfinder traveling on the westbound side.
One person is confirmed deceased, one person was transported via air ambulance, and two were transported by ground ambulance.
The westbound side currently has one lane blocked while crews work to clear the scene.
Names are being with-held pending notification of kin.
-------------
↧
DUI Leads to Horrifying Crash in North Charleston
Drunk Driver Plows into Car and Bystanders, Arrested on Felony DUI Charges It all started with a small accident on Ashley Phosphate Road in North Charleston, early on Saturday morning. No DUI was involved at first. A 911 caller told the dispatcher, “It’s ok, no one’s hurt.” Then, screams – police officers yelled. “We need [...]
↧
Designated Drivers Also Drink and Drive, Study Shows
New Study Shows 2 out of 5 “Designated Drivers” Also Drink and Drive Researchers from the University of Florida went to a small Florida town to conduct research into how many people drink and drive. They interviewed and breath-tested over 1,000 partiers at a bar, who were mostly white, male, and college-aged. What they discovered [...]
↧
↧
Circuit Court is vindicated in felony case
The Facts of the Case: On 11 October 1988, the petitioner was charged in the circuit court with three traffic-related offenses. One of the charges was for DUI in violation of the Florida Statutes, to wit: that any person who...
↧
Crash on I15 at milepost 65 near Pocatello
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE - generated by our News Release ListServer
DO NOT REPLY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho State Police
District 5 5205 South 5th Ave.
Pocatello, Idaho 83204-2299
(208) 236-6466 FAX: (208) 236-6068
For Immediate Release: 06/16/13 8:50pm
Please direct questions to the District Office
On June 16, 2013 at 6:53 pm, the Idaho State Police investigated a single-vehicle rollover northbound on I-15 at milepost 65, 2 miles south of Pocatello. David Martinson, 28, of Vancouver, Washington, was northbound in a 2007 Nissan Xterra in the right lane. John Stoor, 50, of Chubbuck, was northbound in a 1994 Honda Passport in the left lane. There was a juvenile passenger in Stoor's vehicle. Martinson made a left-hand lane change, and Stoor swerved to avoid impact. As a result, Stoor lost control of the vehicle and rolled, coming to a rest in the median.
Stoor was transported to the Portneuf Regional Medical Center by ground ambulance. All subjects were wearing seatbelts. One lane of travel was blocked for approximately one hour for the crash investigation.
↧
"Closing the Widening Net: The Rights of Juveniles at Intake"
The title of this post is the title of this notable new piece by Tamar Birckhead now available via SSRN. Here is the abstract: Should juveniles have more, fewer, the same or different procedural rights than are accorded to adults?...
↧
2 Weeks After Mortgage Fraud Conviction, Defendant Charged Again
Charles Christopher Head, 36, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, two weeks after being convicted at trial in Sacramento in a huge mortgage fraud case, was arrested in Pennsylvania and charged with a new crime. Head and three others were arrested by detectives from the Moon Township Police on Wednesday, June 12, 2013 during a prostitution sting at an [...]
↧
↧
Unitended Consequences and Unrecognized Victims
Guilty or innocent, being charged with a even a relatively minor crime fucks up your life. And the lives of your family and friends. There's the financial hit, of course. Hiring a lawyer if you have the funds isn't cheap. Bond if you can make it. Maybe you pay in cash, maybe you pay a bondsman, maybe you put your house up, or your parent's house. Or your friends'. (Just try asking someone to mortgage their house - or put it in escrow to the court - for your bond if you want to learn who your true friends are.) Even if you're out on bond, you're likely to lose your job. And your spouse may lose her/his job, too. There's the embarassment factor. You're ashamed to go outside because you think the neighbors are pointing at you. And they are. Invitations to parties dry up. Your kids friends aren't allowed to go to your house anymore. And your kids aren't welcome at theirs. Your kids are taunted at school. You don't get the newspaper any more because your picture might be in it. You don't watch the news on TV anymore, either. Everyone tries to keep a brave face, but it's becoming clear that this whole nightmare won't go away quickly.And of course, if you're in custody it's even worse. See the family only through glass and talking on the phone. Or maybe it's a contact visit or at least one across a table but you're in a room with other people who are all jabbering away and frankly it's ugly and why should the family have to be virtually strip searched to see you. I mean, they didn't do anything wrong.But surely the truth will come out at trial and it will all be well again.Except it never will. Because the accusation is always there and the neighbors will always wonder and you're out all that money and your old job isn't really just waiting for you. And OhMyGod (sorry, I don't do teenage/twitter shortcuts) what if you're actually convicted. Even if you're innocent.I've long said that the unrecognized victims of crime are the family and friends of the accused and convicted.Meet Steven Phillips. ![]()
In 1982, Steve and Traci Phillips were starting a new business. Traci was pregnant with their first child. Life was good. Then Steve was charged with a string of sex crimes. Brandi Grissom in the Texas Tribune picks up the story. In two trials in 1982 and 1983, he was convicted based largely on eyewitness identifications, despite his wife’s vehement protestations from the witness stand that he could not have committed the crimes.He pleaded guilty to additional charges to prevent a third trial and a likely life sentence. She said she spent the next decade visiting him in prison, raising their son, sending money for items her husband needed, and hoping to find a way to get him out. That's what people do for the ones they love who are in prison. But you know, those visits, the cash, the raising the kid. Trying to make the child understand why Daddy isn't home. And the neighbors and the other kids at school and . . . .In 1992, they were divorced.Naturally, that isn't the end of the story. Because Traci was right all those years ago back on the witness stand. Steve didn't do it. He'd been in prison 24 years when the DNA tests came back. (24 years. You guys in Florida paying attention?) Wasn't him. It was another guy. Steve wasn't just released, he was declared innocent.One of the things Texas does right these days is compensate the wrongly convicted. At least some of the time.In 2009, the state awarded him lump sum payments totaling more than $2 million, and a monthly annuity of more than $11,000. In total, his compensation package for the time he spent in prison is worth nearly $6 million, not including health care and education benefits he is also eligible to receive.Which isn't bad, though really,there's no amount of cash and benefits to make up for 24 years of horror, lost opportunity, lost family, lost life. Still, $6 million is a lot of swag.Re-enter Traci Phillips. She's now Traci Tucker, and she figures she's entitled to a share. “He was a victim of a wrongful justice system, and his family was also,” Tucker said.Which is certainly true. And is how the judge who awarded her a bit over $150,000 looked at it. Steve, of course, doesn't quite look at it that way. The $6 million he got was for what was done to him, not to them. And while he appreciates her testifying for him, well, yeah. But 24 years. And she never came to visit all that often even before the divorce. And there are the other lawsuits. And the legal fees (he figures some $300,000 so far).On the other hand.Matt Kita, a lawyer for Tucker, said the law should account for the damage done to spouses of the wrongfully convicted, who lose companionship and income and face the stigma of having an incarcerated mate.“She could have been an awesome spouse, or she could have been a terrible spouse, but the law hosed her,” Kita said.Which is absolutely true. But still. He spent 24 years in the embrace of the Texas prison system. In time, she got on with her life.Tucker said she hoped the case would prompt legislators to consider the havoc that wrongful convictions wreak on families.“It’s not all about the money,” she said. “There’s just no recognition whatsoever. Just ‘sorry folks, sorry we ruined your life and took your provider and your best friend.’ Nothing.”Frankly, I can't imagine that the Lege is going to decide to provide compensation for the former spouses of the wrongly convicted. But even the spouses and children and other family and friends of the rightly convicted suffer for what they didn't do.And nobody cares. Which is a monstrous wrong.We put them on welfare, deny them housing, destroy their lives. To prove how tough we can be on their guilt spouses and parents and family and friends. That'll teach 'em to love people who get accused of crimes. Even if they're innocent.Steve Phillips spent 24 years in prison for a series of crimes he didn't commit. Everyone suffered.It is a question that one legislator who helped write the compensation law said lawmakers had not considered.“This is an example of the law of unintended consequences,” said state Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas. “We did not think about entitlement by spouses who had become divorced from these innocent men while they were in prison.”I'm sure they didn't. Didn't think about the ones who stayed married, either, I'd wager. Or their kids. Or the parents and siblings and lovers and friends. Unintended consequences. Yeah. And unrecognized victims.
In 1982, Steve and Traci Phillips were starting a new business. Traci was pregnant with their first child. Life was good. Then Steve was charged with a string of sex crimes. Brandi Grissom in the Texas Tribune picks up the story. In two trials in 1982 and 1983, he was convicted based largely on eyewitness identifications, despite his wife’s vehement protestations from the witness stand that he could not have committed the crimes.He pleaded guilty to additional charges to prevent a third trial and a likely life sentence. She said she spent the next decade visiting him in prison, raising their son, sending money for items her husband needed, and hoping to find a way to get him out. That's what people do for the ones they love who are in prison. But you know, those visits, the cash, the raising the kid. Trying to make the child understand why Daddy isn't home. And the neighbors and the other kids at school and . . . .In 1992, they were divorced.Naturally, that isn't the end of the story. Because Traci was right all those years ago back on the witness stand. Steve didn't do it. He'd been in prison 24 years when the DNA tests came back. (24 years. You guys in Florida paying attention?) Wasn't him. It was another guy. Steve wasn't just released, he was declared innocent.One of the things Texas does right these days is compensate the wrongly convicted. At least some of the time.In 2009, the state awarded him lump sum payments totaling more than $2 million, and a monthly annuity of more than $11,000. In total, his compensation package for the time he spent in prison is worth nearly $6 million, not including health care and education benefits he is also eligible to receive.Which isn't bad, though really,there's no amount of cash and benefits to make up for 24 years of horror, lost opportunity, lost family, lost life. Still, $6 million is a lot of swag.Re-enter Traci Phillips. She's now Traci Tucker, and she figures she's entitled to a share. “He was a victim of a wrongful justice system, and his family was also,” Tucker said.Which is certainly true. And is how the judge who awarded her a bit over $150,000 looked at it. Steve, of course, doesn't quite look at it that way. The $6 million he got was for what was done to him, not to them. And while he appreciates her testifying for him, well, yeah. But 24 years. And she never came to visit all that often even before the divorce. And there are the other lawsuits. And the legal fees (he figures some $300,000 so far).On the other hand.Matt Kita, a lawyer for Tucker, said the law should account for the damage done to spouses of the wrongfully convicted, who lose companionship and income and face the stigma of having an incarcerated mate.“She could have been an awesome spouse, or she could have been a terrible spouse, but the law hosed her,” Kita said.Which is absolutely true. But still. He spent 24 years in the embrace of the Texas prison system. In time, she got on with her life.Tucker said she hoped the case would prompt legislators to consider the havoc that wrongful convictions wreak on families.“It’s not all about the money,” she said. “There’s just no recognition whatsoever. Just ‘sorry folks, sorry we ruined your life and took your provider and your best friend.’ Nothing.”Frankly, I can't imagine that the Lege is going to decide to provide compensation for the former spouses of the wrongly convicted. But even the spouses and children and other family and friends of the rightly convicted suffer for what they didn't do.And nobody cares. Which is a monstrous wrong.We put them on welfare, deny them housing, destroy their lives. To prove how tough we can be on their guilt spouses and parents and family and friends. That'll teach 'em to love people who get accused of crimes. Even if they're innocent.Steve Phillips spent 24 years in prison for a series of crimes he didn't commit. Everyone suffered.It is a question that one legislator who helped write the compensation law said lawmakers had not considered.“This is an example of the law of unintended consequences,” said state Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas. “We did not think about entitlement by spouses who had become divorced from these innocent men while they were in prison.”I'm sure they didn't. Didn't think about the ones who stayed married, either, I'd wager. Or their kids. Or the parents and siblings and lovers and friends. Unintended consequences. Yeah. And unrecognized victims.
↧
New Snowden Release: U.S. and U.K. Spied on Allies During G-20
The Guardian disclosed more information from Edward Snowden today. The U.S. and U.K. spied on their allies at the G-20 summit in 2009, by intercepting telephone lines and email.
Foreign politicians and officials who took part in two G20 summit...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
New York City Cop May Have Coerced Confessions
Many people think that everyone who confesses to a crime is guilty. But coerced, involuntary and false confessions can lead to wrongful conviction and grave injustice. And some cops will go to unscrupulous lengths to make a case.
As a case in point, the Brooklyn district attorney’s office is reviewing 50 homicide convictions to see whether the convictions were based on coerced confessions, The New York Times reports.
The office’s Conviction Integrity Unit plans to reopen every murder case that resulted in a guilty verdict after being investigated by Detective Louis Scarcella, a discredited police detective who handled some of Brooklyn’s most notorious crimes during the crack epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s.
![New York Involuntary Confessions]( "David Ranta Wrongful Conviction")
The Times examined a dozen cases involving Scarcella and found what it called “disturbing patterns,” including the detective’s reliance on the same eyewitness, a crack-addicted prostitute, for multiple murder prosecutions, and his delivery of confessions from suspects who later said they had told him nothing.
In five cases, suspects questioned by Scarcella began their confessions with either “you got it right” or “I was there.”
“It’s hard to imagine all five people used the same exact words,” the Times was told by Richard Leo, a University of San Francisco law professor who specializes in confessions. “It almost sounds like a template.”
Scarcella’s name surfaced in March after a judge freed David Ranta, who had spent 23 years in prison after being convicted of murdering a rabbi. Prosecutors determined that Ranta’s conviction resulted in large part from flawed police work.
Among the alleged misdeeds committed by Scarcella and a partner are failing to pursue a more logical suspect, and the removal of violent criminals from jail to let them smoke crack cocaine and visit prostitutes in exchange for incriminating Ranta.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
The Times examined a dozen cases involving Scarcella and found what it called “disturbing patterns,” including the detective’s reliance on the same eyewitness, a crack-addicted prostitute, for multiple murder prosecutions, and his delivery of confessions from suspects who later said they had told him nothing.
In five cases, suspects questioned by Scarcella began their confessions with either “you got it right” or “I was there.”
“It’s hard to imagine all five people used the same exact words,” the Times was told by Richard Leo, a University of San Francisco law professor who specializes in confessions. “It almost sounds like a template.”
Scarcella’s name surfaced in March after a judge freed David Ranta, who had spent 23 years in prison after being convicted of murdering a rabbi. Prosecutors determined that Ranta’s conviction resulted in large part from flawed police work.
Among the alleged misdeeds committed by Scarcella and a partner are failing to pursue a more logical suspect, and the removal of violent criminals from jail to let them smoke crack cocaine and visit prostitutes in exchange for incriminating Ranta.
↧
The Cert Petition
Now that Supreme Court has at least forced Durham to respond, I thought it might be worthwhile to analyze the falsely accused players’ petition, written by Williams & Connolly attorney Kannon Shanmugam. A couple of general points:(1) The petition doesn’t even bother to respond to JudgeGregory’s race-based opinion in the 4th Circuit—perhaps presuming, correctly, that any Justice who would find even one word of Gregory’s rant persuasive would never vote to grant cert anyway.(2) The petition frames the question for the Court in a narrow manner: “Whether police officers who conspire with a prosecutor to fabricate evidence for subsequent use are immune from liability as a matter of law by virtue of the conspiring prosecutor’s decision to use the evidence.” This framing accomplishes two purposes: first, to preemptively meet at least some of the concerns expressed by Judge Wilkinson in the 4th Circuit; and second, to more clearly distinguish the Evans case from the McFadyen case, which might also still be appealed to the Supreme Court.The petition opens by pointing to a 2009 case, Pottawamie County, which revolved around the question of whether a prosecutor had absolute immunity if he conspired with police to procure false evidence, and then used that evidence at trial. The case was ultimately settled before the Supreme Court decided it, but the cert petition notes that the Solicitor General and (at oral argument) five justices argued that the police in such a circumstance could be held civilly liable. On this point, of course, the 4th Circuit disagreed; and since Pottawamie County was settled before resolution, these sentiments didn’t form a clear precedent.The petition’s description of the lacrosse case facts pulls no punches. Noting that although Mangum “provided wildly inconsistent and patently implausible statements concerning the circumstances of the alleged rape to Durham police officers and to personnel at the Duke Medical Center,” Durham authorities elected to turn the case over to Sgt. Gottlieb, “an officer with a known history of malicious prosecution, false arrest, excessive use of force, fabrication of evidence, and filing of false police reports directed against students at Duke University.” (Keep in mind that news of Gottlieb’s past was initially broken not by defense attorneys but by the N&O and then in greater detail by the Chronicle.) Gottlieb and Himan, in turn, were instructed to take orders from Mike Nifong, who despite acknowledging that the lack of evidence left the trio “fucked” made dozens of inflammatory statements to the media. Those “false statements inflamed the Durham community” to such an extent that on “March 29, Durham police supervisors . . . ordered them to expedite the identifications and arrests of Duke lacrosse players.” Misconduct continued through the rigged photo array to the meeting with Dr. Meehan, and directly led to the indictments of the falsely accused players.But the misconduct did not end when Nifong achieved his twin goals: indictments, coupled with his successful nomination.In a clever and important point, the petition notes that Nifong, Gottlieb, and Himan continued their wayward behavior—whether overseeing the arrest of cab driver Moezeldin Elmostafa, or through Gottlieb’s production of an “after-the-fact ‘report’ of his purported activities in the investigation.” Even by the 4thCircuit’s claim that indictments broke a chain of misconduct, this behavior occurred after indictments. As the petition notes, the 4th Circuit opinion did not explain how these examples of post-indictment misconduct were shielded by “an independent intervening act—i.e., (p)rosecutor Nifong’s decision to seek the indictments,” between the arrests on false causes and the untoward pre-indictment behavior of Gottlieb and Himan. The 4th Circuit nonetheless dismissed the federal civil rights claims against the duo, which in turn provided grounds for the dismissal of the suit against the city of Durham.The petition invites the Court to determine that the 4th Circuit erred on any of several different grounds. First, several courts of appeals have taken much different approaches than did the prosecution-friendly 4th Circuit panel on what sort of intervening conduct can shield police officers, and the city that employs them, from a federal civil rights suit. The 2nd and 6th Circuits, for instance, “have held that police officers may be liable for the ‘natural consequence’ or ‘reasonably foreseeable result’ of their investigative misconduct, despite a prosecutor’s subsequent action that contributes to the injury.” The 9th Circuit wasn’t quite as broad, but did render an opinion that would seem to allow suits for clear cases of police misconduct leading to indictments. And while, the petition asserts, the 5th, 7th, and 11th Circuits have adopted standards that an intervening indictment “breaks the causal chain absent evidence that the officers misled or pressured the prosecutor,” their specific guidelines would not have shielded Gottlieb and Himan.The petition also explains that the breadth of the 4th Circuit’s opinion “implicitly took sides in another Circuit conflict, on an issue that stands as a logical antecedent to the causation issue: . . . whether the fabrication of evidence at the investigation stage, standing alone, gives rise to a constitutional violation.” The 1st and 8th Circuits have said it does; the 2nd Circuit said it does not. Obviously the 4thCircuit panel agreed with the 2nd Circuit.Finally, and in perhaps the document’s most interesting section, the petition forcefully takes on Judge Wilkinson’s absurd arguments that allowing the case to go forward would initiate a floor of lawsuits from other figures, or that somehow we should see Durham police employees as victimized figures in the process. The petition argues that Supreme Court holdings dating back nearly 80 years have established that “prosecutorial action undertaken as part of a conspiracy to fabricate evidence with investigating officers does not absolve the officers of liability for their improper investigative acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.”And yet, “in reaching a contrary decision, the Fourth Circuit heavily relied on the concern that recognizing liability in the circumstances presented here would open the floodgates to similar claims that officers conspired with prosecutors ‘render(ing) the officers’ qualified immunity from suit effectively lost and mak(ing) discovery the rule, rather than the exception.”This fear, the petition correctly notes, is absurd. First of all, “one would hope that there are few, if any, cases in the pipeline even remotely similar to this one.” Second, judges already have more than sufficient tools to toss out weak or implausible cases under relevant Supreme Court precedent. Durham, of course, tried and failed at that task—an indication of just how strong the plaintiffs’ case is on a factual basis. Finally, and contrary to Judge Wilkinson’s concerns, the petition observes that the Supreme Court “has consistently declined the invitation to insulate officials entirely from liability in the face of similar ‘floodgates’ arguments.”As I’ve noted previously, from a factual standpoint, the case made in the petition is extremely strong. Indeed, in light of the 4th Circuit’s ruling, the standard in Maryland, North and South Carolina, and Virginia and West Virginia is that (to quote Judge Beaty) “no provision of the Constitution has been violated, and that no redressable claim can be stated, when government officials intentionally fabricate evidence to frame innocent citizens, even if the evidence is used to indict and arrest those citizens without probable cause.”Will four justices be willing to evaluate the case individually, on its own merits—in a manner that Judge Wilkinson in particular did not?
↧
↧
Payette Man Sentenced for Possessing Firearms in Furtherance of Drug Trafficking
BOISE – Chadwick Duane Powell, 35, of Payette Idaho, was sentenced today in United States District Court to 75 months in prison followed by five years of supervised release for possession of firearms in furtherance of drug trafficking crimes, U.S. Attorney Wendy J. Olson announced. U.S. District Judge Edward J. Lodge also ordered Powell to forfeit two firearms and the ammunition he possessed, and to pay $2,670.42 in restitution for the cleanup of hazardous materials related to a methamphetamine laboratory that Powell kept in a shed behind his residence. On March 12, 2013, Powell pleaded guilty to count three of the superseding indictment.According to the plea agreement, on June 11, 2012, law enforcement officers executed a search warrant at a residence in Fruitland, Idaho. Powell was located hiding in a closet in the master bedroom. After retrieving a key from Powell, the officers unlocked a shed behind the residence that housed a small methamphetamine laboratory. The building contained chemicals, ingredients and equipment necessary to manufacture and produce methamphetamine. In Powell’s bedroom, law enforcement located a glass jar containing 41.1 grams of pseudoephedrine. In the shed, officers found a modified Winchester 12 gauge shotgun with a sawed-off barrel and six shotgun shells. According to the plea agreement, Powell admitted he possessed the shotgun in furtherance of drug trafficking crimes, including manufacturing methamphetamine and maintaining premises for the purpose of manufacturing methamphetamine. Officers also discovered a loaded FEG 9mm handgun with a single round of 9 millimeter ammunition in Powell’s bedroom. A box of 9 millimeter ammunition containing 29 rounds was located in the garage next to the shed which housed the methamphetamine laboratory.The case was investigated by Idaho State Police, Fruitland Police Department, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
↧
THE UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION AMENDS THE U.S.S.G. PROVISION CONCERNING ACCEPTANCE OF RESPONSIBILITY
The United States Sentencing Commission (U.S.S.C.) has submitted a number of amendments to the United States Sentencing Guidelines that are to take effect on November 1, 2013. The amendments in their entirety may be found here.From a practical standpoint, the most important amendment may be one of the changes to U.S.S.G. 3E1.1. Section 3E1.1 is that provision of the Guidelines that addresses Acceptance of Responsibility. The section provides for a 2 point reduction to the base offense level for a defendant who "clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility for his offense." The change to this section added the following language. "The government should not withhold such a motion based on interests not identified in §3E1.1, such as whether the defendant agrees to waive his or her right to appeal." The U.S.S.C. added this change to to the Guidelines to clarify and resolve a split among several U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals. Some Courts held that it was proper for the Government to decline to file an acceptance of responsibility motion where the Defendant refused to sign an Appellate waiver. Other Courts disagreed, and ruled that the refusal to file a motion for acceptance of responsibility merely because the Defendant refused to sign an Appellate waiver did nothing to advance the interests of 3E1.1. The U.S.S.G. amendment makes clear that an accused person's refusal to sign an Appellate waiver should not affect one's right to Acceptance of Responsibility points, and nor should other factors or considerations not identified in the text of 3E1.1 itself, or the Commentary.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Facts Increasing Mandatory Minimum Must Be Decided by Juries – Alleyne v. United States
In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that juries, not judges, must decide any facts that would increase the defendant’s maximum sentence. That’s because every defendant has the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial. But two years later, the same court ruled there’s no right to a jury trial of a fact triggering a mandatory minimum sentence. That decision was overturned today with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Alleyne v. United States. Allen Alleyne was convicted of robbery. At Alleyne’s trial, the jury found that he had used a firearm in a crime of violence, but not that he had “brandished” it, which increased the mandatory minimum sentence. The judge applied the mandatory minimum for brandishing anyway, but the Supreme Court overturned this, ruling that Alleyne had a Sixth Amendment right to have this determined by a jury.
Alleyne and an accomplice robbed a store manager who was driving the day’s cash receipts to the bank. The accomplice wielded a gun as he approached the manager. After he was caught, Alleyne faced, among other charges, a charge of using a firearm in relation to a crime of violence. This charge carries at least five years, but the penalty is increased if the accused brandished or discharged the firearm. The jury found that he used the firearm, but not that he brandished it. The presentencing report from prosecutors recommended a seven-year sentence for the “brandishing” version of this charge, but Alleyne objected, citing the jury’s decision. The judge overruled him, citing an earlier Supreme Court decision that this case overturns. The Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed.
The U.S. Supreme Court reversed itself, finding that the earlier decision was inconsistent with a yet earlier decision, 2000’s Apprendi v. New Jersey, and the Sixth Amendment. The Constitution requires that each element of a crime be proved to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Previous Supreme Court cases have ruled that “sentencing factors” are not elements of a crime that must be so proven, but the current Court agreed with Alleyne that these cases can’t be reconciled with the logic of Apprendi. That case held that a “fact” is an element of the offense. The majority in this case argued that facts that increase the floor as well as the ceiling of the sentence, because both kinds of fact can make a penalty harsher. The case being overturned, and the dissent in this case, argued that the higher sentence didn’t require a jury because it could have been imposed without a finding of brandishing, because the range of five years to life includes seven years. But the majority found this irrelevant to the analysis of what the Sixth Amendment requires.
This is a great decision for defendants facing serious criminal charges. A lot is at stake when defendants reach sentencing. The difference between five years in prison and seven years in prison is two years of the defendant’s life. The dissenters in this case glossed over this issue, but it doesn’t matter whether the two years are attached to the bottom of a sentencing range or the top—those two years are very important to the defendant and his or her loved ones. That’s why this case will be welcomed by anyone facing a mandatory minimum, which includes a lot of serious federal and state crimes involving drugs and narcotics, sex or violence.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
